No Discrimination Claim For Employee Who Set Up Personal Break Room

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
04/22/2015
One of the more interesting (or bizarre) “news” stories of the past few weeks was the one about the Alaska Airlines worker who fell asleep in the cargo hold a plane, awoke mid-flight, and called 9-1-1 to report his dilemma. Napping on the job, and causing a flight to make an early landing, is not good for an employee’s job security. The same is true for employees who create their own break rooms in contravention of employer policy. In a...
read more

Business Judgment Rule Supports Best Buy's Firing of Disabled Employee

Every once in a while, I read a case where my first reaction is:  "how does someone like this ever hold a job?"  That was my reaction when I read the Court's April 10, 2015 decision in Sharp v. Best Buy Co., Inc. out of the United States District Court for Western District of Kentucky. In Sharp, the plaintiff was an auto technician who suffered from narcolepsy and cataplexy. Best Buy accommodated his conditions by excusing him from shift work, and...
read more

Hooters Rails Against Award in Arbitration It Required

Darrell VanDeusen
Darrell VanDeusen
04/04/2015
Employers without a union sometimes think it’s a good idea to consider implementing a policy that requires employees to arbitrate workplace claims rather than permit them to pursue remedies in court. The selling point, the story goes, is that it’s cheaper, faster and you don’t have to worry about a jury deciding the fate of the parties. Anyone who has gone through the arbitration process knows that along with the positives of arbitration –...
read more

Court Rules Morgue Worker Injured While Transporting Cadaver Can Proceed With Pregnancy Discrimination Claim.

Tiana LaSalle is a van driver for the New York City morgue. LaSalle sued her employer alleging a variety of discrimination claims. Her chief complaint, however, appeared to be that the City refused her request for an accommodation with regard to lifting heavy objects during her pregnancy. In November 2011 Plaintiff was pregnant, and she provided her boss with a doctor's note informing him of the pregnancy. In December 2011, LaSalle told her...
read more

Supreme Court Clarifies Pregnancy Discrimination Act Claims in Young v. UPS

On March 26, 2015,  the Supreme Court announced its decision in Young v. UPS, setting forth a new standard for how employees may prove a claim of pregnancy discrimination under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA). Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 575 U.S. ____ (2015).  In Young,  the Court faced the issue of how to interpret the second clause of the PDA, which states: women affected by pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions...
read more

Merely Alleging Decision-Maker Bias Insufficient to State a Title VII Claim

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
03/20/2015
It’s a victory for Fourth Circuit employers (Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia) as the court clarifies that a complaint alleging employment discrimination must contain facts in support of each element of a claim in order to survive a motion to dismiss. McCleary-Evans v. Maryland Dept. of Transportation, No. 13-2488 (4th Cir. March 13, 2015). In this case, McCleary-Evans, an African-American woman, applied for two...
read more

Customer Rep With Social Anxiety Can Proceed to Trial on Disability Claims

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
03/18/2015
Can an employer lawfully fire a customer service employee whose social anxiety precludes her from interacting with customers? Not before exploring whether it can offer the employee a reasonable accommodation to perform her job duties, explained the Fourth Circuit in last week’s decision: Jacobs v. N.C. Administrative Office of the Courts, No. 13-2212 (4th Cir. Mar. 12, 2015). In this case, Christina Jacobs, who suffered from social anxiety...
read more

Fourth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of EEOC Background Check Claims

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
02/24/2015
On February 20, the Fourth Circuit became the second jurisdiction to reject the EEOC’s most recent attempt to expand disparate impact race claims. In EEOC v. Freeman, the Fourth Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of an employer in a case involving a challenge by the EEOC to the use of criminal background and credit history checks in the hiring process. The decision marks the second time in less than a year that the EEOC’s tactic has been...
read more

No ADA Claim For Teacher With Fear Of Young Children

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
02/20/2015
The Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), requires employers to provide a reasonable accommodation to an employee who is a qualified individual with a disability. Employers are not required to provide unreasonable accommodations, such as those that do not enable an employee to perform the essential functions of a job or require the employer to create a new position. The Sixth Circuit recently reiterated this well-established rule in a case...
read more

“Perceived National Origin” Discrimination Claims Viable Under Maryland And Federal Law

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
02/17/2015
Does Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 cover claims of discrimination based on a  perceived protected trait? Last week, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland answered "yes,"  holding that a plaintiff’s Title VII and Maryland Fair Employment Practices Act claims of discrimination based upon perceived national origin are viable causes of action. Arsham v. Mayor & City Council of Balt. No. 1:14-cv-02158 (D. Md. February...
read more
Email Updates

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Loading